The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

?php
>

Friday, February 3, 2017

Linda Sarsour is a defender of Sharia law

On "The First 100 Days" tonight, women's rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali reacted to a recently resurfaced tweet written by an organizer for last month's Women's March, which disparaged Ali and another activist.

Linda Sarsour, of the Arab American Association of New York, tweeted in 2011 that Ali and Brigitte Gabriel should be assaulted and that she wished she could remove their private parts because they "don't deserve to be women."

Ali, a victim of genital mutilation while living in Somalia, blasted Sarsour as a "fake feminist" who is not interested in universal human rights.

"She is a defender of Sharia law," Ali said, "No principle degrades and dehumanizes women more than Sharia law."

FoxNews.comSource: http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/02/01/ayaan-hirsi-ali-slams-womens-march-organizer-linda-sarsour-sharia-law Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The coming battle inside the CIA.

As David Horowitz warned in Big Agenda, despite the election of Donald Trump “there are many battles to come.” One of the most important will take place in the CIA, now headed by Kansas Republican Mike Pompeo. He faces damage left by outgoing CIA boss John Brennan, who never should have had that job or any intelligence post, not even to make coffee.

In 1976, year of the American Bicentennial, the Communist Party USA ticket of Gus Hall and Jarvis Tyner got 58,992 votes. One of them came from college student John Brennan and that requires some context. The CPUSA has always been a wholly owned subsidiary of the Soviet Union, and in 1976 that was evident to all but the willfully blind.

The year 1976 marked more than a quarter century since Richard Wright, Arthur Koestler, Andre Gide, other former partisans of the USSR wrote The God That Failed, a powerful indictment of Communism. The year 1976 marked twenty years since Nikita Khrushchev denounced the crimes of Stalin, and many fled the Party.

The year 1976 marked six years since Alexander Solzhenitsyn won the Nobel Prize for literature. The great writer had been imprisoned for criticizing Stalin, and his Gulag Archipelago charted the prison camp system of the USSR.

The Communist Party USA candidate in 1976 was Gus Hall, a slobbering Stalinist who defended the USSR during the worst of its atrocities and remained faithful to the end. So it took a special kind of person to vote for Gus Hall and the Communist Party USA in 1976, but John Brennan was up to the task.

Brennan said he voted Communist because he was unhappy “with the system” and saw “the need for change.” As Commies author Ron Radosh pointed out “a lot of people wanted change—but very few of them, perhaps 1/10th of 1 percent, supported the presidential candidate of the American Communist Party, Gus Hall. Indeed, the CPUSA at that time was dedicated to gaining support for Soviet foreign policy, with the intent of defeating the United States in the Cold War.”

Radosh also noted that former Clinton National Security Adviser Anthony Lake failed to become CIA director because he thought Alger Hiss might be innocent. Brennan touted his vote for the CPUSA and as Radosh noted, “in a sane world, he would have been turned down.” Brennan got the job, which makes sense, given the person who chose him.

Occidental College student Barry Soetoro described as his “Pop” the Stalinist pornographer Frank Marshall Davis, a security risk with an FBI file 600 pages long. Barry knew he was not electable with that pedigree, so he claimed in Dreams from My Father that dead Kenyan Barack H. Obama “bequeathed” his name to him.

Rebadged as the son of a Kenyan goatherd, Barry Soetoro duly gained election as the 44th President of the United States and served two terms. As Paul Kengor noted in The Communist, his policies bore remarkable similarities to the writings of Davis. So it makes sense that the President Formerly Known as Barry Soetoro (PFKBS) would have no problem with a CIA boss who voted Communist in 1976. On the other hand, there was more to it.

While living in Indonesia, Barry Soetoro attended a “predominantly Muslim school,” as The Audacity of Hope explains. So PFKBS would welcome a CIA boss who served as his campaign adviser in 2008 and publicly praised “the goodness and beauty of Islam,” in his view “a faith of peace and tolerance.”

In 2012, Brennan played in fabricating the false narrative that Benghazi was a spontaneous protest of a video. After Brennan became CIA boss in 2013, he transformed the agency into a partisan propaganda service for PFKBS and his designated successor Hillary Clinton. She was the Secretary of State who dismissed the four American dead in Benghazi with: “what difference, at this point, does it make?”

Mike Pompeo, by all indications a capable man, understands that the Central Intelligence Agency is the eyes and ears of the United States against all enemies, radical Islamic terrorists prominent among them. The CIA does not exist to function as a private Comintern for any politician.

Stalinist-voting John Brennan, who believes Islam is a “faith of peace and tolerance,” is out but questions remain. What did he destroy or conceal about the President Formerly Known as Barry Soetoro? And of course, Brennan’s moles remain in place. As with corrupt Justice Department and IRS officials, they need to be exposed, fired, and prosecuted.

Director Pompeo should also take a hard look at anyone hired on the watch of John Brennan and PFKBS. Neither was properly vetted, so check out who they let slip in. And by all means, apply extreme vetting to all now seeking to enter the CIA. And as inspector Claude Lebel told Madame de Montepellier in The Day of the Jackal, “be in no doubt as to the seriousness of your position.”

In the war for the nation’s future, this will be a crucial battle. If the Trump administration can’t pull it off, they might consider scrapping the CIA and starting afresh with a new agency. As President Trump says, the nation has deep needs in infrastructure.

Leftist UC Berkeley students and outsiders rioted last night to prevent Milo Yiannopoulos from delivering a David Horowitz Freedom Center-sponsored speech demanding the end of “sanctuary campuses” that harbor illegal aliens. Milo's address, which was canceled amid violent mob attacks, fire-setting, and wanton property destruction, had been scheduled to mark the launch of the Freedom Center’s #nosanctuarycampusforcriminals campaign.“One thing we do know for sure: the Left is absolutely terrified of free speech and will do literally anything to shut it down,” Yiannopoulos, tech editor at Breitbart News, said after being safely evacuated from the campus.“This is what tolerance looks like at UC Berkeley,” Mike Wright, a Berkeley College Republicans member told SFGate as smoke bombs exploded nearby. He said paint was thrown on his person. “It’s sad.”

“The so-called ‘sanctuary movement’ is a concerted effort by left-wing administrations in major cities to thwart the purposes of the Patriot Act, undermine federal immigration law, and cripple the efforts of the Department of Homeland security to protect American citizens from terrorist threats,” David Horowitz, founder and CEO of the Freedom Center, said on Jan. 31.“Thanks to the efforts of left-wing activists and administrators, this seditious movement has now spread to our colleges and universities.”Backed by the Freedom Center, Yiannopoulos, an outspoken gay, Jewish, Greek-born British citizen who ardently supports President Trump, was on campus to demand that federal grants to UC Berkeley be withdrawn and that university officials like UC President Janet Napolitano and Berkeley Chancellor Nicholas Dirks who endanger their students with their illegal alien-shielding policies be prosecuted.UC President Napolitano, formerly President Obama’s Homeland Security Secretary, is under the microscope because, as head of the taxpayer-supported University of California system, she is deliberately harboring hundreds of illegal aliens attending UC system schools. She has forbidden campus police from working with immigration law enforcement and provided $5 million to aid the illegals UC is sheltering from ICE.The University of California system even provides legal aid to illegal alien students who wish to keep breaking U.S. immigration laws.The executive director of the University of California Undocumented Legal Services Center at the UC Davis School of Law explained to Rolling Stone in December what a sanctuary campus was.“Basically it’s a concept that says, ‘You’re safe here, and your immigration status, we won’t ask,’” said Maria Blanco. “’We won’t turn you over. We won’t turn your records over.’”Not all the rioters were from Berkeley.Many of those dressed black bloc-style so police can’t identify them appear to be associated with the “antifa” movement. Antifa may be short for anti-fascist but these thugs, usually a mix of anarchists and communists, use violent fascistic tactics against their targets. These terrorists do not tolerate opposing views. Before the riots broke out those gathered carried signs that read “hate speech is not free speech.” Signs from the Party for Socialism and Liberation (PLS) also showed up in Berkeley.Antifa is also involved in the protests and melees at airports nationwide launched in opposition to President Trump’s Executive Order 13769 which as of Jan. 27 temporarily banned visitors from a handful of terrorism-plagued Muslim nations.The Berkeley police had reportedly been given a “stand down” order which allowed rioters to generate mayhem. Later when the police declared the throng of troublemakers an unlawful assembly and ordered those present to leave, the mob chanted “you go first!”After leaving the campus Yiannopoulos reflected on the night’s events in a video on his Facebook page.

I don’t want to get into wild conspiracy theorizing or pointing fingers but it’s been noted by a number of people including Tucker Carlson at Fox News that the police presence did not seem to be particularly aggressive this evening and that’s something that I witnessed and that my security detail witnessed too. There was a sort of sit back, let it happen approach.I was evacuated, really, at the first sign of trouble. Trouble did get a lot worse after I did leave so I think I’d’ve had to leave anyway. So this event may never have got off the ground. It seems as though the university and police didn’t really want it to happen but the fact that on an American college campus, a place of higher education, a place of learning in America which I’d come to, as a visitor from the United Kingdom where we don’t have a First Amendment, hoping that this would be somewhere where you could be, do, and say anything, where you could express your views, express your opinions, crack some jokes, make people think, make people laugh, free from violent responses to political ideas. I thought America was the one place where that would be possible.I am, of course, not the racist or the sexist or anything else that the posters that they put up claim that I am. They do that in order to legitimize their own violence against you. But even if I were, even if the things that they said about me were true, this still wouldn’t be an appropriate response to ideas.

The rioting is amply documented on social media.Twitter is overflowing with video footage from Berkeley last night showing rioters beating people thought to be conservatives or supporters of Yiannopoulos or President Trump with poles and spraying mace into their eyes. One video appeared to show an unconscious man lying face down in the street being beaten with a shovel. The rioters even provided a soundtrack to accompany their violence, giving the insurrection a rave-like quality as “We Found Love” by recording artist Rihanna was blasted out by loudspeakers.“Kill fascists” was spray-painted on a shop window. A Starbucks outlet was looted. ATMs at a Bank of America branch were smashed.Of course any students participating in the mayhem yesterday should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and expelled from Berkeley. Teaching and administrative staff may also have been involved in the violence and if so they too should be dealt with severely.But given the University of California system’s full-throated embrace of lawlessness, don’t hold your breath.

Local authorities aren’t much better.The mayor of Berkeley, Jesse Arreguin (D), seemed to green-light the riots in a Twitter post. “Using speech to silence marginalized communities and promote bigotry is unacceptable,” he tweeted, in a reference to Yiannopoulos. “Hate speech isn't welcome in our community.”When things spiraled out of control, he backpedaled, tweeting, “Violence and destruction is not the answer[.]”And don’t forget that the George Soros-funded slander shop, Media Matters for America, helped to lay the groundwork for the leftist violence surrounding Yiannopoulos in Berkeley and at other stops on his speaking tour. It has long urged colleges to prevent him from speaking, characterizing his mere words as harassment.

Berkeley, interestingly enough, was the home of something that called itself the Free Speech Movement in the 1960s.But that was a long time ago.

The Muslim world effectively and brazenly bans Israelis from entering its countries or even landing in transit. Why is that allowed?

There is a wave of shameful and distorted comparisons between Donald Trump’s executive order, which temporarily prohibits citizens from seven majority Muslim countries —Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen — from entering the U.S., and the Holocaust, the Nazi extermination of six million Jews. Liberals are outraged by the U.S. order, which will protect the United States and freeze the visa mechanism to improve the vetting of would-be immigrants - for all of three months.

There are the unbelievably hypocritical liberals denouncing the fate of “Iraqi Christians” who will be barred entry to the US now. Where have these liberals been - why didn't we hear them when the Islamic State exiled and raped and murdered these Christians? Where were these liberals when Barack Obama discriminated against these Eastern Christians by welcoming more and more Muslim “refugees” instead of them?

Iran and Iraq are taking revenge and now forbid Americans from travelling in their countries? Who wants to visit Tehran, Baghdad, Damascus, Tripoli, Mogadishu, Khartoum and Sanaa?

But beyond whatever one thinks about Trump’s measure, I have never heard the same liberal outrage for the fact that in Trump’s targeted group the countries of Iran, Syria, Libya, Yemen and Sudan refuse entry to travelers holding passports or documents indicating that they have been in Israel. Israeli nationals are not permitted transit through these countries even if the traveler does not intend to leave the aircraft.

These Muslim countries, which today benefit from the world’s liberal compassion, target the citizens of only one state: the State of Israel. Isn’t that “racial harassment” and “religious discrimination?” Is it not worthy of a New York Times’ tirade, an Amnesty International report and a United Nations’ lamentation? No? The Muslim ban on Israeli citizens is not a three months’ executive order. It has lasted for 70 years.

Dear liberals, stop crying about “the new Anne Frank” in the Twittersphere and return to reality.Giulio Meotti, an Italian journalist with Il Foglio, writes a twice-weekly column for Arutz Sheva. He is the author of the book "A New Shoah", that researched the personal stories of Israel's terror victims, published by Encounter and of "J'Accuse: the Vatican Against Israel" published by Mantua Books.. His writing has appeared in publications, such as the Wall Street Journal, Frontpage and Commentary. Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/20116 Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Russia, which enjoys close ties with Tehran, is siding with Iranian
leaders arguing that Tehran has not violated the UN resolution because
Tehran's ballistic missile is not "capable of delivering nuclear
weapons". Moscow is playing with words.

"Regarding the issue of
production of ballistic missiles for hitting moving targets, I should
say that we are among a handful of countries that have gained the
knowhow (in this field)". — Iranian Brigadier General Hossein Salami,
January 29, 2017.

Iran has the largest ballistic missile arsenal in the Middle East.

"Iran has received Soviet-designed Scud-B missiles and it has
adapted the design into two independently-built versions; the Shahab 1
and Shahab 2." — Center for Strategic and International Studies,
November 2014

Right after the executive order from the White House to put a hold on
issuing visas to seven countries including Iran, Tehran has test-fired
a ballistic missile. The U.S. intelligence community was able to detect
Iran's launch. Iran conducted the launch at a well-known location near
the capital, Tehran.

Iran has confirmed firing a ballistic missile. This ballistic
missile's launch would constitute Iran's ninth test-firing of ballistic
missiles since the nuclear deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action
(JCPOA), reached between P5+1 and Iran.

Intriguingly, on the same day that Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard
Corps (IRGC) test-fired a ballistic missile, Iran's state media outlet Tasnim News Agency quoted IRGC Brigadier General Hossein Salami who bragged about Iran's ballistic capabilities and achievements. General Salami boasted
that Iran is among few countries that can produce ballistic missiles
and strike moving targets. Speaking to reporters in Tehran on Sunday,
Brigadier General Salami pointed out:

"Our enemies have stood against us with complex and
special tactics and techniques...In order to confront them, we need to
take the initiative and employ special methods, techniques and
tactics...Regarding the issue of production of ballistic missiles for
hitting moving targets, I should say that we are among a handful of
countries that have gained the knowhow (in this field)".

Iran is breaching the UN Security Council Resolution 2231. Security Council resolution 2231 (section
3 of Annex B) "calls upon Iran not to undertake any activity related to
ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear
weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology." In
addition, the United Nations Security Council resolution 1929, states:

"Iran shall not undertake any activity related to
ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including
launches using ballistic missile technology, and that States shall take
all necessary measures to prevent the transfer of technology or
technical assistance to Iran related to such activities."

Russia, which enjoys close ties with Tehran, is siding with Iranian
leaders arguing that Tehran has not violated the UN resolution because
Tehran's ballistic missile is not "capable of delivering nuclear
weapons". Moscow is playing with words.

Technically speaking, for Iran's ballistic missile to be capable of
delivering nuclear weapons, it has to have a 500 kg payload. It is
well-known that Iran's ballistic missiles have much higher payload capabilities. According
to Center for Strategic and International Studies, "Iran has received
Soviet-designed Scud-B missiles and it has adapted the design into two
independently-built versions; the Shahab 1 and Shahab 2. Both of which
have the same diameter of 88 cm and their ranges, for a 750 kg warhead,
are 340 and 440 km respectively. For a 1000 kg warhead, the ranges
become 285 and 370 km. Even though the Shahab-1 could fit a 1000 kg
warhead but it cannot reach deep into GCC territory. Whereas the Shahab 2
nuclear capability is marginal to deliver nuclear warhead in excess of
350 km."

In addition, due to their range, Iran's ballistic missiles are
capable of delivering nuclear weapons to many Middle Eastern countries.
Center for Strategic and International Studies adds:

Iran's Shahab 3 & 3M missiles which have a diameter
of 125 cm and a range in excess of 900 km with a payload of 1,000 kg
would be able to deliver a nuclear warhead to many of the Middle East
capitals and high-value targets.

Germany
and the UK appear to be on the side of the US when it comes to whether
Iran has violated the UN resolution or not. Germany's Foreign Ministry pointed
out the missile test "give reason for serious concern" and that Germany
believes the test was incompatible with the UN resolution.

Iran is also dangerously provoking other regional states and destabilizing the region.

According to a previous report obtained by the Associated Press,
the launches are "destabilizing and provocative" and the Shahab-3
medium-range ballistic missile and Qiam-1 short-range ballistic missile
fired by Iran are "inherently capable of delivering nuclear weapons."

Iran is publicly challenging President Trump and his administration.
Iranian leaders are sending a signal that Trump's presidency is not
going to alter Tehran's core pillars of foreign and revolutionary
policies towards Israel and the US. Iranian authorities are also testing
the water to examine what Washington's reaction would be and whether
the White House would react the same way that it did under Obama
administration.

Iran became emboldened to an unprecedented level during the Obama
administration. As President Trump's national security adviser, Michael
Flynn, pointed out the Obama administration's nuclear deal is "weak and ineffective."

"Instead of being thankful to the United States for these
agreements, Iran is now feeling emboldened.... the Obama administration
failed to respond adequately to Tehran's malign actions - including
weapons transfers, support for terrorism and other violations of
international norms".

Trump administration has officially put Iran on notice. Flynn stated
"Recent Iranian actions, including a provocative ballistic missile
launch and an attack against a Saudi naval vessel conducted by
Iran-supported Houthi militants [from Yemen], underscore what should
have been clear to the international community all along about Iran's
destabilizing behavior across the Middle East," Flynn said.

Nevertheless, Iran is not backing down. Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan signaled
that Iran will continue with its current behavior " The recent test was
in line with our plan...Nobody can influence our decision. We will not
allow foreigners to interfere in our defence affairs."

US allies are on the side of Washington when it comes to opposing
Iran's military adventurism. Trump administration can use the power of
these alliances. President Trump ought to continue with robust responses
to Iran's violations. Because If Iran's aggressions and violation are
disregarded, Tehran will interpret it as weakness and as a green light
to continue with its anti-American, anti-Semitic, revolutionary and
militaristic policies. If Iranian leaders' military adventurism and
destabilizing behavior are ignored or downplayed, as it happened under
Obama administration, Tehran will be significantly emboldened and
empowered; hence Iran will more powerfully pursue policies that damage
US national security interests.

Continuing to take the lead in adequately addressing Iran's
destabilizing behavior and violations will be extremely critical at this
point because it will define Iran's behavior, whether Tehran will be
taking Trump administration seriously afterwards, ensure US allies'
security, and it will restore US global image and leadership.

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh, political scientists and Harvard
University scholar is president of the International American Council on
the Middle East. He can be reached at Dr.rafizadeh@post.harvard.edu.Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9880/iran-tests-trump Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

To
date Israel has been reluctant to claim sovereignty over these lands
as the Arabs living there would then demand citizenship resulting in a
binational state. This is unacceptable to most Israelis. They also
reject the two-state solution.

The GOP unanimously approved a pro-Israel platform at their convention in July 2016 which stipulated:

“The U.S. seeks to assist in the establishment of comprehensive and lasting peace in the Middle East, to be negotiated among those living in the region,”

David Friedman and Jason Greenberg, representing Donald Trump, participated in the drafting and were in complete agreement with the final text.

Gone was any reference to the Palestinian people or to a two-state solution. In addition, the platform included the words “We reject the false notion that Israel is an occupier.” If not an “occupier,” then presumably Israel is a sovereign.

Accordingly, the search is on for an alternate solution. Such a solution could take inspiration from the short-lived Feisal/Weizmann Agreement of 1919. The essence of this agreement was that Palestine as it then was, was to be divided into two states, one for the Arabs and one for the Jews. Chaim Weizmann on behalf of the Jews agreed to help develop the Arab state and King Feisal agreed to welcome Jewish settlement in the Jewish state and favored friendly cooperative relations.

Although the British didn’t breathe life into this agreement, they did separate Trans-Jordan from Palestine in 1922 with the Jordan River being the boundary between them. Trans-Jordan (Jordan) thus got 78% of the lands promised to the Jews. The remaining 22% consisting of the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean was to be the Jewish state. This was enshrined in the Palestine Mandate signed by the League of Nations in 1922.

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the "Mandate for Palestine," confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in Palestine—anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

With respect to the Arabs living in Jewish Palestine, the Congressional Record contained the following:

“(2) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, they shall be required to sell their lands at a just valuation and retire into the Arab territory which has been assigned to them by the League of Nations in the general reconstruction of the countries of the east.

(3) That if they will not consent to Jewish government and domination, under conditions of right and justice, or to sell their lands at a just valuation and to retire into their own countries, they shall be driven from Palestine by force.”

The US was not a member of the League of Nations at this time. In order to be able to protect American interests in Palestine, she entered into the 1924 Anglo-American Convention in which the U.S. bound itself to the terms of the Mandate. This of course meant the recognition of Jewish right to close settlement of Palestine and that all of Palestine was to be the Jewish homeland.

Since then, there were a number of unsuccessful attempts, contrary to the terms of the Mandate, to further divide Jewish Palestine into two states. UN General Assembly Resolution 181, passed in 1947, recommended partition, but was rejected by the Arabs. The Jews on the other hand took advantage of it and declared their independence in 1948. Israel owes its independence to that declaration and not to Resolution 181, which was only a recommendation, precipitating the move.

Nothing has happened of any legal consequence since, to cancel the right of the Jews to settle and be sovereign over all the land to the Jordan River.

To date Israel has been reluctant to claim sovereignty over these lands as the Arabs living there would then demand citizenship resulting in a binational state. This is unacceptable to most Israelis. They also reject the two-state solution.

So what is the alternative?

Consider for a moment, that if Jordan agrees to grant citizenship to all Palestinians, as their law currently provides, and invites the return of all of them to live and work in Jordan, the conflict would soon be ended. While King Abdullah isn’t about to do so, the Jordan Opposition Coalition (JOC) would. This coalition represents all opposition groups in Jordan that back a secular state. The JOC since its creation six years ago has supported good relations with Israel. It does not include groups that support terrorism. This alliance has agreed to work together in order to form the government of Jordan should King Abdullah abdicate. Although at least 75% of Jordanians are Palestinians, the King has disenfranchised them to a great extent in favor of the ethnic Hashemites and Bedouins.

The JOC has produced a detailed plan, Operation “Jordan in Palestine,” which clearly identifies their goals and the operational steps needed to implement their plan. Copies are available upon request.

All that is necessary for this to come to pass is for the U.S. to instruct the king, who currently spends most of his time outside Jordan, to not return home. Then it would arrange for the Jordanian army, which it controls, to support the next popular Palestinian uprising, and to designate who among them would form the interim government.

The JOC puts it this way:

This plan seeks to execute a feasible two-state solution where Jordan is the natural homeland for all Palestinians, and Israel becomes sovereign over all soil west to the River Jordan. This could only happen if the corrupt, terror-supporting and double-speaking Hashemite royal family leaves Jordan. The Palestinians often revolt against the regime but the king’s police force puts them down. The American media ignore this solution to the unrest in Jordan.

What is needed is for the U.S. to influence the Jordanian army and security agency to stand with the revolution the next time it breaks out. The security agencies and army are already securing the country without any influence from the king who is mostly abroad. Under these conditions, the king would not return. Once that happens an interim government of secular Palestinians who want peace with Israel could be appointed.

Once the interim government is installed, it will strengthen the economy by stopping theft of government money and ending corruption. It will fully enfranchise the Palestinians. All Palestinians around the world would be welcomed to return to Jordan pursuant the current Jordanian citizenship act, which already recognizes all Palestinians as citizens of Jordan. Many Palestinians will emigrate to Jordan in part because many have family members and friends living in Jordan. Work opportunities as well as a rewarding benefits/welfare system will be made available to them by the new interim government as further inducement.

Israel, with many international partners, including the U.S., could finance the building of a new Jordanian city of 1 million people. This would greatly stimulate the Jordanian economy and would provide work for the returning Palestinians. The new homes could be made available to the returnees and locals at subsidized prices further incentivizing people to return. The ending of King Abdullah’s discrimination against Palestinians living in Jordan, would also contribute to making Jordan a desired immigration destination.

Michael Ross, an attorney and member of the Republican Jewish Committee, wrote after the election of Donald Trump, “Trump Must Speak to Mudar Zahran“ because Zahran offers the alternate solution that Trump is looking for.

As part of this solution, all Palestinian refugees enrolled with UN Relief And Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East could be repatriated to Jordan and given citizenship. Thus UNRWA could be wound up and the current UNRWA funding could be transferred to Jordan to assist in the resettlement.

According to Moshe Feiglin, the head of the Zehut Party in Israel, the Oslo Accords have cost Israel over 1 trillion shekels since they were signed. In addition, Israel has borne the cost of three military campaigns in Gaza. Finally, Israel supplies to the Palestinians their energy, water and sewage treatment for free or at greatly subsidized prices.

Last summer, Feiglin proposed a Solution in which Israel extends Israeli law from the Mediterranean to the Jordan:

We will give the Arab population in those territories three options: The first is voluntary emigration with the aid of a generous emigration grant. The second is permanent residency, similar to the “Green Card” status in the US – not like what is currently the practice in East Jerusalem. This status will be offered to those Arabs who publicly declare their loyalty to the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish Nation. We will safeguard their human rights and will not do anything like we did to ourselves in Gush Katif. The third option will be reserved for relatively few Arabs, and only in accordance with Israeli interests. Those who tie their fate to the fate of the Jewish Nation, like the Druze, can enter a long-term process of attaining citizenship.

Martin Sherman has published a similar plan which he calls the “Humanitarian Solution” as opposed to a strictly political solution. He summarized all his writings in support of such a plan and published them here.

With an estimated $300,000 per family grant, both he and Feiglin have estimated that incentivized compensated emigration will cost Israel over $200 billion USD but both argue it is feasible and worth doing.

The repatriation of Palestinians to Jordan, as proposed by JOC, would greatly facilitate the Palestinian emigration and greatly reduce the grants needed to incentivize it. UNRWA and the Palestinian Authority would both be wound up.

1.75 million Palestinians live in Judea and Samaria (West Bank). They could remain there as Jordanian citizens or emigrate to Jordan as they wished. Hebron, Nablus, Ramallah, and Bethlehem are the primary centers. Ramallah is only 42 miles from Amman, the capital of Jordan. A new highway could be built connecting all these cities to Amman.

The 1.8 million Palestinians living in Gaza, of which 1.3 million are registered as refugees, would be incentivized to emigrate to Jordan. After enough leave, Israel could extend its sovereignty to Gaza thereby ending that perennial problem.

Considering the subsidies that the West provides to UNRWA, Gaza and the PA, this would be a bargain. Given that JOC has tied its fate to Israel, Israel would be happy to contribute to such a solution as the present conflict costs her hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

It really is that simple. There is much more that can be said in support of it.

Prof. Hillel Frisch, a senior research associate at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies and Yitzhak Sokoloff, a fellow of the Ingeborg Rennert Center for Jerusalem Studies at Bar-Ilan University recently wrote Trump and the Jordanian Option.

The inauguration of an American administration uncommitted to the principle of an independent Palestinian state provides Israel with the opportunity to advocate a long-term strategic vision of building up a prosperous Jordan that could provide an alternative to the model of a two-state solution based on the Palestinian Authority.

They are wrong to suggest that this can be done with King Abdullah. I believe, as does the JOC, that the king is part of the problem and must be replaced by Palestinians.

A Jordanian-Palestinian federative solution would offer the Palestinians space in addition to their autonomy. We could also consider adopting a joint Israeli-Jordanian-Palestinian economic framework. And there are many other ideas that could be constructed as a result of quiet, serious work with the backing of a supportive US administration.

He is right but the ultimate alternate solution is the one put forward by the JOC.

If anyone wants more information or can help this solution get traction, please write me (tbelman3@gmail.com).

Ted BelmanSource: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/02/the_ultimate_alternate_israelpalestine_solution.html Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

British PM Theresa May denounced the 'discriminatory' prohibition instituted by 16 Muslim countries against the entry of Israelis.

Theresa May

Reuters

Donald Trump's controversial ban on the entry to the US of citizens
of seven Muslim countries has also drawn attention to a less known
prohibition instituted by 16 Muslim countries against the entry of
Israeli citizens into their territory. The issue reached the British
parliament on Wednesday, where British Prime Minister Theresa May
denounced the discrimination against Israelis and called on Opposition
Leader Jeremy Corbyn to join her in denouncing the discrimination.

At a Prime Minister’s Questions session in the House of Commons
Wednesday, May was asked about the issue by Conservative MP Theresa
Villiers.

May answered that “it is absolutely right that this house should be
aware of the discrimination and the ban that exists around the
world…particularly for those who are Israeli citizens.”

“We are consistent with our approach. We don’t agree with that
approach [of banning entry to countries by citizens] and it’s not an
approach that we will be taking. And I wait for the day when the right
honorable gentleman opposite actually stands up and condemns it, too.”

Corbyn has been accused in the past of anti-Semitic statements, such
as when he appeared to compare Israel to the Islamic State in a speech
against anti-Semitism within the Labor party.

The list of nations that bar entry to Israeli nationals include six of the seven countries targeted by Trump’s action.

Legislation in US House and Senate seeks to honor late Egyptian President Anwar Sadat for being first Arab leader to make peace with Israel.

Sadat addressing the Knesset

Flash 90

JTA - Bipartisan legislation in the US House of Representatives and
the Senate would honor Anwar Sadat posthumously with the Congressional
Gold Medal for leading Egypt to peace with Israel.

The medal, the highest civilian honor bestowed by Congress, would be
conferred in 2018, the centenary of the late Egyptian president’s birth.

“President Sadat was the first Arab leader to recognize Israel,” said
Sen. Ben Cardin, D-Md., who joined Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, in
introducing the bill in the Senate. “He displayed courage and vision
when he negotiated the peace treaty, fundamentally changing the course
of history in the Middle East for the better.”

Backing the bill in the House are Reps. Grace Meng, D-N.Y., and Chris Stewart, R-Utah.

The bid to confer the medal is being promoted by The Friedlander
Group, a New York-based publicity and lobbying firm with a focus on
Jewish issues.

Militant Islamists assassinated Sadat in 1981 because of the 1978
Camp David peace deal he forged with Israel. Sadat and Israeli Prime
Minister Menachem Begin received the 1978 Nobel Peace Prize.

The medal, launched in 1776 and first awarded to George Washington,
also has been conferred on Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust memoirist and
Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Shimon Peres, the former Israeli president
and prime minister, Menachem Mendel Schneerson, the Lubavitcher rebbe
and Raoul Wallenberg, the Swedish diplomat who was abducted by the
Soviets and who died imprisoned by them after saving tens of thousands
of Hungarian Jews during the Holocaust.

JTASource: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/224315 Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Prime Minister's Office says special team "will begin to work in the immediate future in order to find a location and to establish the settlement" • Defense minister stresses that all settlement construction is new, does not recycle previous tenders.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

|

Photo credit: Dudi Vaaknin

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Wednesday
announced the first step toward the establishment of a new settlement
in Judea and Samaria, indicating a shift in policy for the first time in
several years.

According to the prime minister, the
establishment of the settlement will be determined by a special team, as
was promised to the leaders of the settler movement about six weeks
ago. The team will include settler representatives, the defense
minister's adviser on the settlement enterprise and the Prime Minister's
Office chief of staff.

The Prime Minister's Office released a
statement saying, "The team will begin to work in the immediate future
in order to find a location and to establish the settlement."

"We are in a new period in Judea and Samaria,
returning to the normal, proper track, and we will provide a fitting
response for the needs of those living in the area," Lieberman said. "We
are managing a broad campaign, so sometimes you lose a battle here and
there, but it is more important to win the campaign. The fact is that it
is possible to build 5,700 housing units in Judea and Samaria, and -- I
repeat -- 3,600 will be built and put on the market immediately.

"I have seen some attempts to downplay the
importance, to lead public opinion astray a bit. I hope everyone knows
... that you can take the list of all the 5,700 housing units and see
that none of them have been announced before."

The decision to expand the settlement enterprise was met
with condemnation from the European Union. The French Foreign Ministry
and Turkish government also expressed opposition.

Shlomo CessanaSource: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=40051 Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

"Huge sums of money from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates,
Qatar, Kuwait and Turkey are flowing to Switzerland... There is a whole
network of radically-oriented mosques in Switzerland."

Swiss authorities are currently investigating 480 suspected jihadists in the country.

"Radical imams always preached in the An-Nur Mosque... Those
responsible are fanatics. It is no coincidence that so many young people
from Winterthur wanted to do jihad." — Saïda Keller-Messahli, president
of Forum for a Progressive Islam.

Switzerland is the answer to those who claim that Islamic
terrorism is reserved for those countries that have participated in
operations against ISIS or other Muslim terror organizations.
Switzerland has done neither, yet its flag figured among sixty other
enemy flags shown in an ISIS propaganda video.

"Huge sums of money from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates,
Qatar, Kuwait and Turkey are flowing to Switzerland... There is a whole
network of radically-oriented mosques in Switzerland. The Muslim World
League is behind it.... The network is a hub for Salafists. The Swiss
authorities make a big mistake of not looking into the mosques." — Saïda
Keller-Messahli.

There are around 70 Turkish mosques financed directly from Turkey through the Diyanet Foundation in Switzerland.

The Swiss government appears to give Qatar, one of the primary
propagators of Wahhabi Salafism in the world today, extremely special
treatment.

In November 2016, Swiss police arrested
the imam of the an'Nur mosque in Winterthur, in the canton of Zürich,
for calling for the murder of Muslims who refuse to participate in
communal prayer. The young imam, who had come from Ethiopia, had been in
Switzerland for only a short time. The Zurich Federation of Islamic
Organizations (Vioz) declared
it was "shocked", and suspended the an'Nur mosque from the federation
until further notice: "We are shocked that an imam in one of our houses
of prayer called for violence."

There is little cause for "shock". Already in 2015, Winterthur made
headlines in Switzerland as an emerging center for young Muslims with
jihadi ambitions. Four people from Winterthur managed to travel to Syria
to join ISIS and a fifth was stopped at the airport in Zürich.

In November 2015, Swiss journalist and Syria expert, Kurt Pelda said,
"The IS has a cell in Winterthur in the vicinity of the An'Nur Mosque
in Hegi, there is no longer any doubt." He also said that in addition to
the five known cases, another man from Winterthur had travelled to
Syria as well.

The former president of the Islamic Cultural Association of An'Nur, Atef Sahoun, denied all claims at the time:

"If we discover radical tendencies in one member, then
the appropriate person will be immediately excluded. We send them away,
no matter who it is".

Atef Sahoun was arrested for incitement in November 2016, along with the Ethiopian imam, but later released.

"Radical imams always preached in the An-Nur Mosque...
Those responsible are fanatics. It is no coincidence that so many young
people from Winterthur wanted to do jihad".

In November 2015, Swiss police carried out a raid on the homes of two
imams at the biggest mosque in Switzerland, the Geneva Mosque, which
was inaugurated in 1978 by the former king of Saudi Arabia. The mosque
is run by a foundation, Fondation Culturelle Islamique de Genève, which
appears to have close ties to Saudi Arabia. While French police refused to comment on the raids or allegations
surrounding the imams, a Swiss paper reported, "...a group of around 20
young extremists had attended the mosque for several months, two of
whom allegedly travelled to Syria".

Swiss authorities are currently investigating
480 suspected jihadists in the country. Switzerland is thus an
excellent answer to those who still claim Islamic terrorism is reserved
for those countries which have participated in operations against ISIS
or other Muslim terror organizations. Switzerland has done neither, yet
its flag figured among sixty other enemy flags shown in an ISIS propaganda video.

Who funds the approximately 250 mosques in Switzerland? The Swiss government does not know,
at least officially, as it has no jurisdiction to collect data on the
financing of Muslim associations and mosques except in exceptional cases
where internal security is threatened.

Doris Fiala is a center-right parliamentarian, who has urged
authorities to create transparency. She wants to list every association
that benefits from foreign money in a commercial registry, its accounts
supervised by an independent cantonal authority and auditor. In
response to her requests, the cabinet told her:

"It is nonetheless common knowledge that governmental
organizations and private individuals send donations from abroad. But
the Federal Intelligence Service does not currently have any information
on possible external funding of mosques that could affect the
protection of the State."

According to Reinhard Schulze, professor of Islamic Studies at the University of Bern:

"There are undoubtedly structured contacts between the
Muslim World League and certain Islamic organizations in Switzerland.
Donations from the World League and other funds coming from Saudi Arabia
are given to those mosques and organizations that are open to the
Wahhabi tradition".

Money from Saudi Arabia reaches
Switzerland in various ways, according to Schulze. One example is the
European Organization of Islamic Centers (EOIC), founded in Geneva by an
Algerian in 2015, which has as its single goal the financing of the
infrastructure of Muslim institutions, and the training and employment
of imams.

"Huge sums of money from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates,
Qatar, Kuwait and Turkey are flowing to Switzerland", Saïda
Keller-Messahli, told the newspaper NZZ in November. According to Keller-Messahli, the an'Nur mosque is not a unique example of a "radical" Swiss mosque:

"There is a whole network of radically-oriented mosques
in Switzerland. The Muslim World League is behind it, training young
imams and sending them out into the world. These are true wandering
preachers, who are not only active in Switzerland, but also in Austria,
Germany, Norway and Denmark. The network is a hub for Salafists. The
Swiss authorities make a big mistake of not looking into the mosques.
The image of the pitiful backyard mosques is no longer true. Currently,
new mosques are being built at the cost of several million francs, most
recently in Volketswil, Netstal and Wil. The idea that these amounts
come from members of the mosques is simply a lie - they come from the
Muslim World League and its organizations, for example in Geneva, with
the clear intention of spreading Salafist thought here".

Furthermore, there are around 70 Turkish mosques,
which are financed directly from Turkey through the Diyanet Foundation
in Switzerland. The most important ones are in Zurich, Lucerne, St.
Gallen, Lugano, Biel, Freiburg and Neuchâtel.

In addition, the Swiss government appears to give Qatar, one of the
primary propagators of Wahhabi Salafism in the world today, extremely
special treatment. Qatar has invested billions
of Swiss francs in Switzerland: Already in 2008, it invested 6 billion
francs in Credit Suisse and the former emir's son is on the board of
directors of the bank. It holds 8.42 percent of the shares of the
commodity group Glencore Xstrata and 4.11 percent of the rice retailer
Dufry. Qatar even has a bank of its own, the QNB Banque Privée Suisse,
which operates in Geneva. Apart from these investments, Qatar has
invested heavily in the Swiss hotel industry, where it is continuing to
grow its influence. It is currently spending one billion Swiss francs on
acquiring and renovating three luxury hotels and resorts in Switzerland
in Lausanne, Berne and near Lucerne, known as the "Bürgenstock
Selection" project. The largest of the three is a resort, high above
Lake Lucerne, where three hotels, ten luxury villas and dozens of
apartments are being built. In the words of Die Welt, "Qatar is building its own village" in Switzerland.

Most telling of all, perhaps, is a small occurrence, which took place at the end of December. Die Welt reported
that the Swiss air force allowed the former Emir of Qatar, Hamad Bin
Khalifa al-Thani, to land in the middle of the night at Zürich airport,
despite the existing night flying ban. The 64-year-old Khalifa al-Thani
had broken a leg on holiday in Morocco, and insisted on being flown to
Switzerland immediately, not caring in the least that no one is allowed
to land in Zürich between three and six o'clock in the morning. The
Swiss Air Force nevertheless agreed to the landing, basing its decision
on a "medical emergency". Just before six, two more airplanes – this
time from Doha, the capital of Qatar - landed, also during the flight
ban.

The Swiss government, evidently, does not mind the ruling family of
Qatar treating Switzerland as an extension of Qatar – and that really
sums up perfectly the ongoing Islamization of Switzerland.

Judith Bergman is a writer, columnist, lawyer and political analyst.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9827/switzerland-jihad Follow Middle East and Terrorism on TwitterCopyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.